International Guild of Knot Tyers Forum

General => Practical Knots => Topic started by: jarnos on July 02, 2021, 09:09:09 PM

Title: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: jarnos on July 02, 2021, 09:09:09 PM
If you use cowboy bowline (ABoK #1034 1/2) as base and lock it by threading the working end through the eye, through the nipping loop and finally through the collar along the standing part, you get an eye-knot reminding of Scott's locked bowline, but additionally being tiable in a bight (TIB). Is there a name for that knot? Who invented the knot?
(https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=5804.0;attach=21065;image)
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: Dan_Lehman on July 02, 2021, 10:26:40 PM
Re Who invented the knot?
--by which I surmise you expect a single-person as the answer
(as opposed to remarking that you seem to have done so (too)--,
I can only note that Scott put forwards the original,
and Mark has noted what you have presented in his
"Bowlines Analysis" --to wit (caption beneath image):
Quote
Scott's Locked Bowline can be made TIB if the tail is set outside of the eye
and then the locking maneuver begins from the inside of the eye.
--which version gains what is likely a far more important
quality than mid-line tying (not relevant to tie-ins, afterall!) :
a 2dia. turn for the tail to make --more easily done for firm rope!

--dl*
====
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: jarnos on July 02, 2021, 11:50:09 PM
Oh, it was presented by Xarax whoever he/she is at https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=19.msg20616#msg20616 (https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=19.msg20616#msg20616). That is in the same thread where SS369 presented the now called Scott's locked bowline earlier.
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: jarnos on July 03, 2021, 06:32:00 AM
So the knot was not invented by Scott and it has different properties. Thus I think it should not be called just Scott's locked bowline even if someone does
at https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=6907.msg45453#msg45453 (https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=6907.msg45453#msg45453).
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: jarnos on July 08, 2021, 02:08:40 PM
Mark Gommers calls ABoK #1034 1/2 as Tail outside Bowline in his Bowline Analysis (Version 3.0), which describes it pretty well. Maybe it could be as basis when naming the locked bowline.
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: agent_smith on July 10, 2021, 04:40:58 AM
As I had pointed out - there are 4 versions of Scotts locked Bowline.
[ ] 2 are based on #1010
[ ] 2 are based on #1034 1/2

Of these 4 versions, only one is 'TIB' (Tiable In the Bight).

I personally use the TIB version for various life critical applications (using human rated EN892, and EN1891 ropes).
The other 3 versions are also suitable for life critical applications (in human rated 'EN' ropes).

...

I had also pointed out that the easiest way to determine if a knot is 'TIB' is to reverse engineer it.
That is, try to untie it without access to either end.
If the knot can be fully untied (without access to either end) so that no remnant knot remains - it is proven to be 'TIB'.

...

Ashley refers to #1010 as a 'right hand' Bowline.
He refers to #1034 1/2 as 'left hand Bowline'.

In my view, this is an unfortunate decision.
Tail inside and tail outside the eye are more appropriate descriptors.

I am of the view that Ashley didn't have a fully developed concept of 'chirality' - or indeed a solid theoretical basis for defining a 'Bowline'.
The essential and fundamental component of all 'Bowlines' is the nipping loop - which can in fact be formed with right-handed ('Z') or left-handed ('S') chirality.
The nipping loop is 'TIB' and must be freely able to trap and crush rope segments contained within its encircling diameter.
The absence of a functional nipping loop is grounds for automatic disqualification from being classified as [a] 'Bowline'.

...

Ashley also states that #1034 1/2 (tail outside) Bowline is inferior to the #1010 tail inside version.
This strongly suggests that Ashley did not have a fully developed understanding of the effects of a transverse load on the eye (some may prefer to use the term ring loading).
When the eye of a #1010 Bowline is subject to a transverse loading profile - it is becomes unstable and can progressively slip and fail.
The #1034 1/2 tail outside Bowline is resistant to a transverse loading profile.
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: jarnos on July 10, 2021, 06:59:34 AM
As I had pointed out - there are 4 versions of Scotts locked Bowline.
[ ] 2 are based on #1010
[ ] 2 are based on #1034 1/2

Of these 4 versions, only one is 'TIB' (Tiable In the Bight).

No, two of them are TIB. They are just mirror images of each other. It is trivial. But if there are two knots based on different knot, why do you call them the same?
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: agent_smith on July 10, 2021, 10:49:11 AM
per jarnos:
Quote
No, two of them are TIB.
More accurately - there are is only one - within a chiral orientation.
Therefore, to be tedious and painfully correct, I should have added; "within a chiral orientation".

It is tedious to always refer to the mirror versions - and it can also be misconstrued.
Virtually all knot book authors only illustrate a knot within one chiral orientation.
You'll never (or very rarely) see the mirror versions also illustrated in their books - their books would double in size/volume.

If you really wish to be tedious - you can argue that their are 8 possible versions of Scotts locked Bowline.
But this starts to get confusing - and could be misleading.

Its tedious to always have to spell out and make it clear that whenever a knot is illustrated, their also exists its mirror version.

Its sort of like having to always point out that their is also an anti version of all the sub-atomic particles. We tend to only refer to a neutron, proton and electron. Yes - there is also an anti proton, anti neutron and anti electron (positron). But - it just starts to get tedious.



Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: jarnos on July 10, 2021, 12:41:50 PM
agent_smith, do you mean there is a knot that you call Scott's locked Bowline that is based on #1034 1/2 and that is not TIB? Can you show that one? You tell it is tedious to refer to mirror versions, but I think it is the same as to refer to versions that have opposite chirality.
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: agent_smith on July 12, 2021, 03:20:53 AM
Happy to engage with you while it remains courteous and does not devolve into a knowledge contest... :)

The 4 fundamental Scotts locked Bowlines (within a chiral orientation) - are all based on the simple #1010 Bowline (tail inside) or simple #1034 1/2 Bowline (tail outside).
The locking tail maneuver is carried out per Scotts original concept.
See image below...

I don't say that there are 8 fundamental Scott locked Bowlines - because it can be misconstrued.
If you wish to declare all 8 - the following qualifying remark is necessary; "taking onto account both S and Z chirality" (but this gets tedious).

I note that virtually all knot book authors only illustrate one chiral orientation of their presented knots.
The size/volume of their books would almost double - if they illustrated both chiral forms for each knot.

Ashley generally only illustrates the 'Z' chirality orientations of his 'Bowlines' in 'ABoK'.
He does not illustrate the 'S' chirality versions.

Having said that - I would remark that there are times where it is important or necessary to point out both chiral orientations - and/or mirror versions of knots.

NOTE 1:
I don't include the Xarax variant as one of the fundamental Scotts locked Bowlines.
The tail maneuver in this version performs a U turn (180 degrees) around the outgoing eye leg.
Reference link: https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?topic=4517.msg30269#msg30269
At the time of his post (Nov 08, 2013) - Xarax did not report that this variant is also TIB.

NOTE 2:
In some of the earlier posts dating back to 2011-2013... the notional reference to 'left hand' and 'right hand' was in conflict with the concept of chirality (ie 'S' and 'Z' loops).
Ashley also confuses this issue where he describes right-hand and left-hand Bowlines.
In my personal view, the Simple Bowline can be either tail inside (#1010) or tail outside (#1034 1/2) the eye.
The term 'right-hand' should be reserved for 'Z' chirality and the term 'left-hand' should be reserved for 'S' chirality.
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: Dan_Lehman on July 12, 2021, 11:48:10 PM
As I had pointed out - there are 4 versions of Scotts locked Bowline.
...
The absence of a functional nipping loop
is grounds for automatic disqualification from being classified as [a] 'Bowline'.

And what qualifies a knot to be a "Scott's Lock BWL"?
Given your four, I will find three more, at least
--one of which I see Alan found, in your ref'd old thread--
(and NSUE ones, to boot, which seems to tickle
some folks' fancy, though it's irrelevant for a tie-in).

(But I'd better tear away before I go googly-eyed
trying to discern one from another, and nevermind
chirality (mirrors are cheaply, readily available) !
As Marvin lamented, "Oh, no, not another one.")

Doesn't Scott look lovely with all his Locks?!


--dl*
====
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: agent_smith on July 13, 2021, 02:28:34 PM
per Dan Lehman:
Quote
And what qualifies a knot to be a "Scott's Lock BWL"?
Given your four, I will find three more, at least
Perhaps you should direct your question to Scott :)

I am not Scotts spokesperson - but, I do admire his discovery.

Although Scotts original presentation was directly based on #1010 Simple Bowline - the locking manoeuvre can just as easily be applied to #1034 1/2.
I am 100% confident that Scoot was aware that he could apply his locking manoeuvre equally to #1034 1/2.
The fact he didn't post images as such - matters not to me - it is obvious that it can apply to both #1010 and #1034 1/2.

In my view, the 3 additional versions I showcase are obvious and in keeping with Scotts original #1010 based presentation. Any tail locking manoeuvre that goes a step beyond Scoots original concept is a different species.

This is contestable - it is not definitive - its my personal view.
You may hold a different view - and you may accept other tail locking manoeuvres that are more complex...which would extend the range of possible 'Scotts locked Bowlines'.

I prefer to set limits - and narrow it to a group of 4; otherwise you open the floodgates and broaden the definition.
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: Dan_Lehman on July 13, 2021, 07:40:28 PM
per Dan Lehman:
Quote
And what qualifies a knot to be a "Scott's Lock BWL"?
Given your four, I will find three more, at least
Any tail locking manoeuvre that goes a step beyond Scoots original concept is a different species.

The "step beyond" details are the question.
All that you've accepted have the tail tucking
initially back BETWEEN returning eye-leg bight's
legs (whew!); what Alan saw & I now see are
that one might tuck back on the away-from-outgoing
eye-leg (& crossing point) side, too; some of these
are NSUExtre'mite's.  They seem close enough to
the Scott seed for inclusion --same *movement*
but a slightly different path.


--dl*
====
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: agent_smith on July 13, 2021, 11:34:20 PM
per Dan Lehman:
Quote
The "step beyond" details are the question.
Its not in question in my mind.
The phrase; "A step beyond" - refers to a tail maneuver that differs in character and basic geometry compared to Scotts original concept.

In examining Scotts original presentation - with the tail locking maneuver applied to the Simple Bowline (#1010):
1. The tail performs a U turn around the nipping loop and re-enters that nipping loop between the legs of the collar.
2. The tail then exits through the collar - and follows the SPart on a parallel pathway.
3. The tail is firmly clamped between the legs of the collar, due to the action of the nipping loop.

Seems simple enough to me :)
Are you seeing something of a different character?

The 3 additional fundamental Simple Bowlines that I advance are of the same general character as Scotts original presentation.
Which brings the tally to 4.

As stated - Scott did not originally post photos of the locking maneuver applied to #1034 1/2 (tail outside Simple Bowline).
But - it is obvious - and I am confident that Scott knew it was obvious - and so he didn't think it imperative to also photograph his locking maneuver on the #1034 1/2 structure.

I note that you (ie Dan) rarely post any photos of your creations or indeed photos depicting technical detail. Maybe you see the act of photographing knot creations as tedious and/or too time consuming?
Maybe Scott was also time poor - and only managed to photograph the #1010 Simple Bowline? As stated, I am sure that Scott was aware of the existence of #1034 1/2 tail outside simple Bowline, and that his tail locking maneuver could also be applied to that structure.

NOTE:
I do not say that there are 8 fundamental Scotts locked Bowlines, because this could be misleading.
There are 4 (within a chiral orientation).
If one wished to assert there are 8 - this would have to be qualified by declaring both chiral geometries - being 'S' and 'Z'.
I find it tedious and unnecessary to do so.

EDIT NOTE: Refer to my earlier post for photos of the 4 fundamental Scotts locked Bowlines...
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: jarnos on July 14, 2021, 12:22:58 AM
Scott presented his bowline with a photo and by saying:
Quote
I want to offer an easy method of securing the WE of a "standard" bowline
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: SS369 on July 14, 2021, 03:08:36 AM
As Mark has surmised, I have performed ?my? simple lock? maneuver with the tail to numerous knots. Not all of them being eye knots.

For some knots it is superfluous, some a little more complicated for little gain and some with interesting aesthetics.

In my original offering, in the thread ?A simple Lock for the Bowline? I tendered my design for the #1010 Bowline because that was what the thread concerned. I did not want to pollute the thread with other wanderings.

This particular working end technique does indeed increase security to a number of eye knots, simply.

And yes, there are variations to the path the working end can take that are relatively ?simple? as well.

The main thing in my mind is; safety while using rope is the main concern, keeping things as simple and secure as possible is paramount.

Scott
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: Dan_Lehman on July 14, 2021, 11:55:38 PM
per Dan Lehman:
Quote
The "step beyond" details are the question.

The phrase; "A step beyond" - refers to a tail maneuver that differs in character and basic geometry compared to Scotts original concept.
Which difference is the question posed.
Now, you get to answering that:

Quote
In examining Scotts original presentation - with the tail locking maneuver applied to the Simple Bowline (#1010):
1. The tail performs a U turn around the nipping loop and re-enters that nipping loop between the legs of the collar.
2. The tail then exits through the collar - and follows the SPart on a parallel pathway.
3. The tail is firmly clamped between the legs of the collar, due to the action of the nipping loop.

Seems simple enough to me :)
Are you seeing something of a different character?
Yes, though I think it much the same *character*;
as I said, Alan showed this.  The difference comes
at your 1st-above criterion --"between the legs..."--:
why insist on this, when tucking beside them gives
much the same feel & shape & effect (and it's as
much the constriction of the nipping loop as any
distinct from-the-legs'-straightening that imposes
nip.

Quote
I note that you (ie Dan) rarely post any photos of your creations or indeed photos depicting technical detail.
Thus I'll refer back to Alan's --to wit:


(https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4517.0;attach=12324;image)
(https://igkt.net/sm/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=4517.0;attach=12326;image)

(And I also tried going on the crossing-point side of
the tail legs, and --whew!-- don't rely on THAT!)


--dl*
====
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: agent_smith on July 15, 2021, 01:28:41 PM
Per Dan Lehman:
Quote
Yes, though I think it much the same *character*
I disagree.

Quote
"between the legs..."--:
why insist on this,
Why not?
Why do you insist on a different geometry?

...

The 4 Scotts locked simple Bowlines that I have tendered all share the same fundamental character.
You are of course entitled to disagree - that's what makes the world an interesting place :)
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: Andreas on July 15, 2021, 03:17:09 PM
For climbers who like scottlock but can not let go of their double overhand finish...

It makes also everyone happy who enjoys a loop to be TIB


Ps,  I'd call this a double overhand bowline, rather than a scottlock variant
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: Kost_Greg on July 19, 2021, 02:59:46 PM
Nice offering Andreas, but as you said, the double overhand, returning eye leg structure, is a rough component, but  still legitimate for life critical applications that require extra level of security.

You may also call your creation the strangle bowline or the barrel bowline  :D.

For my standards, i would experiment with a shaped eight collar TIB form, where the returning bight leg, goes down through the nipping loop and over, under itself, (as in your case), then over itself again and back down through the nipping loop for a third time, exiting finally through the collar, parallel to SPart.

It does not appear to be a prototypical approach, i assume it has been done before, but it keeps the collar component to an unknotted state.
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: Andreas on July 29, 2021, 08:09:59 AM
Yes barrel is fair   ;)  i mention it because the double overhand is the standard finish for thousands of climbers using a bowline. Your eight, that is not an eight but stays unknotted is much more slick.
There is another knot that seems as sturdy and TIB, looks like an eight but isn't,  tail seems to go into the nipping loop a third time, but doesn't.

 In the 1st picture on the left is your unknotted eight as i read it, onthe right the other, that is actually off the scott's lock variation topic when looked closely.

The tail wrapping around the outgoing leg is a weakness or as an advantage for security?

How does it compare to the similar knot shown in the second pic?

Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: Kost_Greg on July 29, 2021, 02:32:07 PM
In the 1st picture on the left is your unknotted eight as i read it,

Your eight, that is not an eight but stays unknotted is much more slick.

And you have read it very well, that's the one i was refering to, (i usually am no good at providing worded tying instructions).  :o

However, i do not make out any vulnerability at this three rope diameter instance, that might initiate tail slippage, or some other security hole at cyclic loading or slack shaking loading impulses.

Note that Scott's locked bowline, also uses an unknotted collar component, but as far as i know, it has been characterised as inherently secure.

There is another knot that seems as sturdy and TIB, looks like an eight but isn't,  tail seems to go into the nipping loop a third time, but doesn't.

 on the right the other that is actually off the scott's lock variation topic when looked closely.

With respect to your first image, rightmost, TIB variation, it looks legitimate too, it also uses three rope diameter inside the nipping loop(?), of an overhand based collar stabilizer, which, IMO, is not alleged to introduce any tail slickness.

The tail wrapping around the outgoing leg is a weakness or as an advantage for security?

How does it compare to the similar knot shown in the second pic?

It looks like you are advancing two schools of thought here, with respect to bowline development   ;).

1) I do not see the tail wrapping around the out-going eye leg as a weakness (first image approach), because if i did, i would had devalued many of the inherently secure bowlines, that are used in the field, without reported failures so far.

In fact, i myself, have used this technique, at many of my very own creations.

2) Yet still, i think i am going to lean towards your second image approach, which exploits the so called Janus mechanism.

In my view, the second collar formation around the on going eye leg, expands the  bowline collar function, providing me two bights with their legs nipped that i can handle after heavy loading, along with the apropriate nip constriction, in order to reach the security standards.

Very good, i sense you're going to feed this forum with a whole lot of fresh TIB bowlines  ;).
Title: Re: Locked cowboy bowline similar to Scott's locked bowline
Post by: Andreas on August 01, 2021, 08:45:44 PM

With respect to your first image, rightmost, TIB variation, it looks legitimate too, it also uses three rope diameter inside the nipping loop(?)


In the first picture you see two ways to dress this knot. You could not dress the tail outside of the nipping loop of scott's locked  bowline, so it's more  truly inside the nipping loop in a sense



2) Yet still, i think i am going to lean towards your second image approach, which exploits the so called Janus mechanism.

Sure enough the search function does not help to get a clue of what janus mechanism is..
Could someone give a hint or explain please 




Very good, i sense you're going to feed this forum with a whole lot of fresh TIB bowlines  ;)

You're  well aware that this kind of prediction has self-fulfilling mechanics...  )

Second picture knot is inspired by your unknotted eight tail finish

Third still resembles a scott's lock  finish vaguely, But it is much more sturdy, clamping the nipping loop from all sides. Tail unknotted as well and just as TIB as second picture knot. It seems to open easy, might jam at higher loads?!


I found both to  be unusually sturdy after drawn tight.